Capital Punishment: for and Against

Thesis One: In principle a case can be made on moral grounds both supporting and opposing capital punishment. Thesis two: Concretely and in practice, compelling arguments against capital punishment can be made on the basis of its actual administration in our society.

Two different cases can be made. One is based on justice and the nature of a moral community. This leads to a defense of capital punishment. The second is based on love and the nature of an ideal spiritual community. This leads to a rejection of capital punishment. A central principle of a just society is that every person has an equal right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Within that framework, an argument for capital punishment can be formulated along the following lines: some acts are so vile and so destructive of community that they invalidate the right of the perpetrator to membership and even to life. A community founded on moral principles has certain requirements. The right to belong to a community is not unconditional. The privilege of living and pursuing the good life in society is not absolute. It may be negated by behavior that undermines the nature of a moral community. The essential basis on which community is built requires each citizen to honor the rightful claims of others. The utter and deliberate denial of life and opportunity to others forfeits ones own claim to continued membership in the community, whose standards have been so flagrantly violated. The preservation of moral community demands that the shattering of the foundation of its existence must be taken with utmost seriousness. The preciousness of life in a moral community must be so highly honored that those who do not honor the life of others make null and void their own right to membership. Those who violate the personhood of others, especially if this is done persistently as a habit must pay the ultimate penalty. This punishment must be inflicted for the sake of maintaining the community whose foundation has been violated. We can debate whether some non-lethal alternative is a fitting substitute for the death penalty. But the standard of judgment is whether the punishment fits the crime and sufficiently honors the nature of moral community.

LOVE AND AN IDEAL SPIRITUAL COMMUNITY

Christian love, is unconditional. It does not depend on the worthiness or merit of those to whom it is directed. It is persistent in seeking the good of others regardless of whether they return the favor or even deserve to be treated well on the basis of their own incessant wrongdoing. An ideal community would be made up of free and equal citizens devoted to a balance between individual self- fulfillment and the advancement of the common good. Communal life would be based on mutual love in which equality of giving and receiving was the norm of social practice. Everyone would contribute to the best of ability and each would receive in accordance with legitimate claims to available resources. What would a community based on this kind of love do with those who committed brutal acts of terror, violence, and murder? Put negatively, it would not live by the philosophy of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and a life for a life." It would act to safeguard the members of the community from further destruction. Those who had shown no respect for life would be restrained, permanently if necessary, so that they could not further endanger other members of the community. But the purpose of confinement would not be vengeance or punishment. Rather an ideal community would show mercy even to those who had shown no mercy. It would return good for evil. The aim of isolation is reconciliation and not revenge. never gives up. It is ever hopeful that even the worse among us can be redeemed so that their own potential contribution to others can be realized. Opportunities for confronting those who had been hurt most could be provided to encourage remorse...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...Oppose CapitalPunishment
Be it resolved that capitalpunishment be legalised in Canada. The death penalty was officially abolished in Canada in 1976 when the Canadian government held a free vote in Parliament to eradicate it from the Criminal Code and over sixty countries around the world have done the same. According to a poll conducted by Angus Reid, a Canadian sociologist, 21 percent of Canadians feel that murderers can be rehabilitated and 54 percent feel that although the convicted murderer has taken a life, it still is not justifiable to take the murderer’s life as the punishment. Capitalpunishment should not be legalised because it does not provide a useful purpose to society, it does not promote the rehabilitation of criminals and it is more retributive than restorative.
Capitalpunishment is not in any way advantageous, if not an inconvenience, to society. After having reviewed numerous studies of the costs of the death penalty in the United States, Dr. Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, had found that it costs more than life imprisonment. The costs consists of all that is needed for a regular trial plus more trial time, experts, attorneys, two trials for guilt and punishment and multiple appeals while the inmates are held a high security confinement centers, which...

...CapitalPunishment: Against
The use of capitalpunishment has been a permanent fixture in society since
the earliest civilizations and continues to be used as a form of punishment in
countries today. It has been used for various crimes ranging from the desertion
of soldiers during wartime to the more heinous crimes of serial killers.
However, the mere fact that this brutal form of punishment and revenge has been
the policy of many nations in the past does not subsequently warrant its
implementation in today's society. The death penalty is morally and socially
unethical, should be construed as cruel and unusual punishment since it is both
discriminatory and arbitrary, has no proof of acting as a deterrent, and risks
the atrocious and unacceptable injustice of executing innocent people. As long
as capitalpunishment exists in our society it will continue to spark the
injustice which it has failed to curb.
Capitalpunishment is immoral and unethical. It does not matter who
does the killing because when a life is taken by another it is always wrong. By
killing a human being the state lessens the value of life and actually
contributes to the growing sentiment in today's society that certain individuals
are worth more than others. When the value of life is lessened under certain
circumstances such as...

...There is a serious controversy when it comes to capitalpunishment. A question is raised as to whether the death penalty should be abolished or upheld. Capitalpunishment creates psychological damage to many of those involved, costs much more than keeping an inmate in prison for life, and ultimately is morally reasonable. I would like to argue that it is not economic, moral, or effective to justify the death penalty.
Though it may seem improbable, keeping someone in prison for life costs millions less than the death penalty. Jacob Hancock of Deseret News comments, “To try, house and execute an offender costs as much as three times what it costs to house an offender for an average life term.” When it is a person’s life that is at hand, the consequences of error resulting in a failed trial are amplified. Because of the magnitude the determination holds, courts must impose severe process protections that cause death penalty prosecutions to cost much more. Trial cases dealing with the death penalty involve a slew of pretrial proposals, supplemental investigation costs and an intensive jury selection process. Overt amounts of money, on average $4.2 million, are being spent on these processes of which many have no productive outcome. For example, in 2008, thirty-five states in the U.S. housed 3,307 death row inmates of which only 37 were executed (Death Penalty Information Center). In consideration of the fact that most...

...An Argument againstCapitalPunishment
The United States of America murders its own citizens. Since the death penalty was re-instated in 1976, 1184 convicts have been executed in the United States, more than 5,000 since 1930. According to Amnesty International there were about 1,600 prisoners executed in 25 different countries in 2006. Of those 1,600 over 90 percent were executed in the following five countries: China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and the United States of America. The world’s foremost democratic and developed country should not be keeping company with those aforementioned countries. CapitalPunishment has practically been abolished in North and South America and European nations. Our neighbor to the south, Mexico, has a policy not to extradite any person to the United States that could be convicted of the death penalty. Canada abolished the death penalty the same year the United States re-instated theirs. In fact, most democracies in the world no longer use the death penalty. Only the United States, South Korea, and Japan still use it. The United States must show the world that it is a leader in human rights. The United States must abolish such a barbaric and unjust form of punishment that statistics show does not deter crime.
A popular belief among death penalty advocates is that it helps to deter crime. But statistics actually show this is not the case at all. Take...

...﻿
Did all these people deserve to die?
How many innocents were killed because of the death penalty?
Everyone thinks human life is valuable. Some of those againstcapitalpunishment believe that human life is so valuable that even the worst murderers should not be deprived of the value of their lives.
They believe that the value of the offender's life cannot be destroyed by the offender's bad conduct - even if they have killed someone.
Execution of the innocent
The most common and most cogent argument againstcapitalpunishment is that sooner or later, innocent people will get killed, because of mistakes or flaws in the justice system.
Witnesses, (where they are part of the process), prosecutors and jurors can all make mistakes. When this is coupled with flaws in the system it is inevitable that innocent people will be convicted of crimes. Where capitalpunishment is used such mistakes cannot be put right.
The death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state and will inevitably claim innocent victims. As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated
Amnesty International
There is ample evidence that such mistakes are possible: in the USA, 130 people sentenced to death have been found innocent since 1973 and released from death row. Source: Amnesty
Things were made...

...CapitalPunishmentCapitalPunishment is the killing of a convicted person who has committed a violent and heinous crime. Capitalpunishment, or the death penalty, is determined through a court of law and is not enforced in all states of the United States of America. It is not used in all murder cases, only those who have been convicted of committing atrocious killings (Hood). The death penalty is solely utilized for the cases in which the convict has committed a crime that has made him or her potentially a threat to society. Some of the crimes committed that receive the death penalty in the state of Texas include: multiple murders, planned murder, repeated crimes, and/or rape and murder. The death penalty has been used since the beginning of history – although it may not have been called such. Monarchies, as well as other forms of government have used the death penalty. Throughout time, people have researched the most painful or slow deaths possible and used these deaths on all sorts of crimes, whether it be offending the wrong person or murdering someone. However, the idea of capitalpunishment was somewhat restricted when the English Bill of Rights was written. This document prohibits the use of “cruel and unusual punishments”.
The death penalty has been used with over millions of people throughout history. For example, during the...

...Marx’s critique of capitalism
Capitalpunishment is very unjust. It is not up to man to decide another person faith. You only get one time to live and your time to die shouldn’t be decided by the corrupt justice system. People who have committed crimes or even accused of crime have been murdered which is unfair. The guillotine was used to carry out many executions in England and throughout the world. The guillotine was used to cut the head of those who committed crime or those who was accused of committing a crime. The guillotine was a short painful death but it was an act of brutal murder. They government seen the negative publicity the guillotine was receiving, so they updated their death penalty to the electric chair. The electric chair was less bloody but more painful. The electric chair was used to kill the victim by sending large amounts of electricity to the victim’s body until they were deceased. The electric chair was involved but water on the victims head to speed up the process, but sometimes executioners would be corrupt or forget to put the water on the victims head. When the water is not placed on the victims head it burns the victims, causing a slow and painful death. There was so many cases of the electric chair gone wrong, which made the government once again change their method of death to lethal injections. Lethal injection is the quickest form of death and comes to in three parts. First the victim is given anesthesia to go...

...CapitalPunishmentCapitalpunishment, also known as the death penalty, is the toughest form of punishment enforced today in the United States. According to the online Webster dictionary, capitalpunishment is defined as “the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a serious crime, often called a capital offence or a capital crime” (1). In those jurisdictions that practice capitalpunishment, its use is usually restricted to a small number of criminal offences, principally, treason and premeditated murder. In the 38 U.S. states and within the federal government currently upholding and enforcing death penalty statutes, this method of punishment varies quite differently amongst them. It is a controversial issue that continues to be debated and overflowing with opinion and emotion by the American public. One of the biggest issues being debated is whether or not the death penalty is immoral, excessively cruel or inhumane. I support capitalpunishment and do not believe that it is cruel or inhumane but that it delivers a small sense of closure to the public. After all, aren’t we a society who has always lived by “an eye for an eye”?
According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty...